Hackmaster. Please explain.

[diaglo]

"Okay, here's that rule you were asking about - oh, better check the DMG as well. Y'know, to make sure the PHB isn't just lying about that."

oh man... you need to go check out the errata for the DMG for the 3.11ed for workgroups on the WotC site.

it says pretty much the exact same thing.

 

[Tsyr]

I don't own HackMaster but would love to play. I did buy one of the moduals a few months ago for some maps I thought would be good for another game. The one I bought was RobinLoft, the parody of Ravenlift and reading through it (a) I was amazed at how close it mirrored the original modual and (b) I was amazed at not only how funny it was but also as well written as it was, too.

I've always liked the RobinLoft adventure. I read through it, and couldn't believe how true it felt to old... I6, was it? something like that. It was great. I ran my 3E group through it, and they all agreed it was an amazing adventure (Most of these are fairly new players, and a couple old timers who never did ravenloft).

Then a few months back I dug my old RavenLoft adventure out, and read it, and couldn't believe how much it sucked, in comparison to RobinLoft. Sure, some of the names are a bit corny... But the adventure itself is *very* sound, and very good.

 

[Doctor_Skull]

When we played, we played for laughs. All the players piled on the flaws during character generation to max out on development points. As a result each one of the characters was stark-raving mad or an emotional cripple. It was hilarous fun for a one-shot, but we'd do it differently if we were to play a real campaign.

I liked the skills, classes and races a lot. It would be hard to get used to paying money for training and going to school to "level up" again, but I suppose it would be ok.

I really liked the various sorts of dependent NPC's. Henchmen, followers, hangers-on, hirelings, and side-kicks all have separate rules. I'd be tempted to port that over to D&D in place of Leadership feat. I always liked henchmen in old school D&D, and the Leadership feat never quite did it for me as a replacement.

If I ran a Hackmaster campaign, I'd probably dump Honor, Alignment Graphing, and the Critical Hit system. The thought of rolling a d10,000 for a critical hit was hilarious in our one-shot, but when every result ended up being double damage anyway, it lost its charm in a hurry.

 

[MonsterMash]

I believe (IIRC) that the humour side was a requisite from WotC to licence the rules to Kenzer.

With the rules there are additions I like, e.g. the honor system, and stuff I'm not so keen on, like the 20 + die rolls for hp, some of the bits from 1e (never played 2e) that I didn't like back then and still don't like, overall I think its a well done product, but for the moment I'm playing 3.5 IMC.

I think that the DM versus players attitude is largely part of the parody, especially looking at KoDT.

 

[Spell]

In the over-the-top, exaggerated sense, yes. While I never played 1E, I played 2E for quite a while, and I don't consider it a complicated game. At least not if you play with the PHB/DMG only. HM, OTOH (don't you like abbreviations), is an unwieldy beast right from the beginning.

As somebody else has already pointed out, HackMaster is much more modular than the d20 system. If you don't like, or don't understand, a rule, you can simply play without it.
You don't like the skill system? You can ignore it. Don't feel like keeping track of your players' honour? Then don't. Alignment is a non-sense for you? Great: just skip that part of the PHB and play on.

I don't think you can actually do that with feats or skills in th d20 system, but maybe that's just me.

Henry: in HackMaster the Game Master is supposed to have a complete and throughout knowledge of the game. That means that he knows which rule he has to apply in any situation.

Despite the accusation of stupidity, I really like this approach. I _never_ use it to gain any advantage over players (for those who are wondering: the GM vs. players approach in the book is meant to be _ironical_, for crying out loud!). But I find that my players listen to me more AND have more faith in my calls ("hey, maybe he's breaking the rules, but it's not our concern... he's probably doing it for plot's and campaign's sake!").
Those long meaningless discussions on which prestige class should I grant them because "if it's in the rule, it is balanced, and I want to play it no matter what!" are GONE!

One final thing: I do like HackMaster much more than any d20 system game. That's my experience, though. If you disagree, please do so without implying that HM fans or Kenzer is immature or stupid. I think this behaviour is completely out of place here. Especially because it's unprovoked.

 

[nsruf]

As somebody else has already pointed out, HackMaster is much more modular than the d20 system. If you don't like, or don't understand, a rule, you can simply play without it.

Sure, but I already own a generic fantasy RPG with D&D/d20. Also, the only people I know who want to play HM are KODT fans who would complain if we didn't play by the full rules. So far, prepping that kind of game has seemed way too much work.

One final thing: I do like HackMaster much more than any d20 system game. That's my experience, though. If you disagree, please do so without implying that HM fans or Kenzer is immature or stupid. I think this behaviour is completely out of place here. Especially because it's unprovoked.

I hope my posts didn't come over that way. If they did, I apologize. I was just giving you my personal impression of HM, which admittedly isn't too great.

 

[Ottergame]

Oh, man...that makes me like it even less than I did before. My D&D group plays Hackmaster a couple of times a month, in addition to our 3e game. I played a couple of games, but dropped out because I was so put off by the ridiculous charts and rules for every little thing. But, in addition to that, they have CONTRADICTORY rules and charts between the books, to keep players on their toes? Ugh. It seems like that would make the PHB nearly useless, since you couldn't trust what you read in it. "Okay, here's that rule you were asking about - oh, better check the DMG as well. Y'know, to make sure the PHB isn't just lying about that."

That brings back the sense of the old AD&D games, where it was the all powerful DM against the hapless players who couldn't ever trust the guy running the show. I like the level playing field of 3rd edition. When the DM is working against the players, now I can recognize it.

EDIT: RPGs are cooperative efforts, and the DM shouldn't be lording secret rules over the players unless that is somehow important to the module and adventure.

 

[Michael Tree]

My favorite quote about hackmaster.

"My hypothesis is that Hackmaster is the Andy Kaufman of the RPG world, a great snarky deconstructive joke on its own fans. The punchline is that *you* are the punchline."
- Philomousos (on RPG.net)

 

[EricNoah]

My favorite quote about hackmaster.

"My hypothesis is that Hackmaster is the Andy Kaufman of the RPG world, a great snarky deconstructive joke on its own fans. The punchline is that *you* are the punchline."
- Philomousos (on RPG.net)

Wow, that is so paranoid... I think an easier explanation is that HM is both loving tribute to, along with some good-natured ribbing of, RPG players in general and "old school" RPG "grognards" in particular. Just like the Knights of the Dinner Table comic which spawned it.

 

[PugioilAudacio]

One thing I forgot to mention, the HackMaster GMG is one of the best books I've ever seen. Even if you're not playing HM I would recommend reading this book. There are a lot of cool things and easily adaptable rules, as well as an excellent appendix that includes a lot of dungeon building tips/tables/help. Plus it's pretty fun to read too